. trusted always would be, able to check the ambitious projects of France, and to give that degree of assistance to the rest of Europe which they had done upon this occasion; and he wished it had been done with more effect. But when the immense acquisitions which France had made were taken into consideration on the one hand, it was but fair, on the other, to consider what she had lost in population, in commerce, in capital, and in habits of industry: the desolation produced by convulsions, such as France had undergone, could not be repaired even by large acquisitions of territory. Comparing, therefore, what France has gained with what she had lost, this enormous increase of power was not quite so apparent as some gentlemen on the other side seemed to apprehend. When he took into consideration the immense wealth of this country, and the natural and legitimate growth of that wealth, so much superior to the produce of rapacity and plunder, he could not but entertain the hope, founded in justice and in nature, of its solidity. This hope was strengthened by collateral considerations, when he looked to the great increase of our maritime power; when he contemplated the additional naval triumphs that we had obtained; when he looked to the brilliant victories of our armies, gained over the flower of the troops of France, troops which, in the opinion of many, were invincible-when he reflected upon these glorious achievements, though he could not but lament our disappointment in some objects, he had the satisfaction of thinking that we had added strength to our security, and lustre to our national character. Since the treaty which had taken place at Lisle, we had increased in wealth and commerce. But there were some important events which had given the greatest consolidation to our strength, and as such, should not be forgotten. The destruction of the power of Tippoo Sultaun in India, who had fallen a victim to his attachment to France, and his perfidy to us, would surely be thought an important achievement. It had frequently been observed, that great dangers frequently produced, in nations of a manly cast of mind, great and noble exertions: so when the most unparalleled danger threatened the sister kingdom, the feelings of a common cause between the people of both coun tries had enabled them to overcome prejudices, some of them perhaps laudable, and all of them deep-rooted, and led to that happy union, which adds more to the power and strength of the British empire, than all the conquests of one and indivisible France do to that country. These were consolations which he wished to recall to the recollection of those who entertained gloomy apprehensions about the strength and resources of Great Britain. 1 If any additional proofs were wanting to prove her ability to protect her honour and maintain her interests, let gentlemen look to the last campaign, and they would see Great Britain contending against a powerful confederacy in the North; they would see her fighting for those objects at once in Egypt and in the Baltic, and they would see her successful in both. We had shewn, that we were ready to meet the threatened invasion at home, and could send troops to triumph over the French in the barren sands of Egypt, before a man could escape from Toulon, to reinforce their blocked-up army; we had met the menaced invasion by attacking France on her own coasts, and we had seen those ships which were destined for the invasion of this country moored and chained to their shores, and finding protection only n their batteries. These were not only sources of justifiable pride, but grounds of solid security. What might be the future object of the Chief Consul of France, he knew not; but if it were to exercise a military despotism, he would venture to predict, that he would not select this country for the first object of his attack; and if we were true to ourselves, we had little to fear from that attack, let it come when it would. But though he did not entertain apprehensions, yet he could not concur with those who thought we ought to lay aside all caution; if such policy were adopted, there would indeed be ground for most serious apprehensions: he hoped every measure would be adopted, which pru. dence could suggest, to do away animosity between the two countries, and to avoid every ground of irritation by sincerity on our part. This, however, on the other hand, was not to be done by paying abject court to France. We must depend for security only upon ourselves. If, however, the views of France were correspondent with our own, we had every prospect of enjoying a long peace. He saw some symptoms that they were, though upon this he had no certain knowledge; but he would never rely upon personal character for the security of his country. He was inclined to hope every thing that was good, but he was bound to act as if he feared otherwise. He concluded by giving his assent to the motion. The question upon the address was afterwards put, and agreed to without a division. June 3, 1803. COLONEL PATTEN, having previously given notice of a motion of censure against his Majesty's ministers, this day submitted to the House the following resolutions ; 1. "That it appears to this House, from the declaration issued by his Majesty on the 18th day of May last, and laid before this House by his Majesty's command, that the conduct of the French republic, during the whole period which has elapsed since the conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace, is considered by his Majesty's ministers as having been altogether inconsistent with every principle of good faith, moderation, and justice; as having exhibited one continued series of aggression, violence, and insult, and as necessarily creating a thorough conviction of a system deliberately adopted by France for the purpose of degrading, vilifying, and insulting his Majesty and his government. 2. "That his Majesty's ministers having throughout the whole period, from the conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace, to the issuing of his Majesty's declaration of the 18th day of May last, neither communicated to par. liament any knowledge of the sense which they now appear to have entertained respecting the conduct and system of France, nor any regular information of the particulars on which the same was founded, or of the steps taken by his Majesty's government thereupon, have thereby withheld from this House the necessary materials for a due and full discharge of its constitutional functions; and that, by encouraging throughout the country an unfounded security and confidence in the permanence of peace, they have embarrassed and perplexed our commerce, have deceived the expectations, and unnecessarily harassed the spirit of the people, and have materially increased and aggravated the difficulties of our actual situation, 3. "That it was the duty of his Majesty's ministers to make timely and adequate representations against such acts as have, in their judgment, constituted a series of aggressions violence, and insult on the part of France. That, by dignified and temperate remonstrances, followed up with consistency, and sustained with firmness, either the course and progress of such acts would have been arrested, without the necessity of recurring to arms, or the determination of the French government to persist therein, would have been distinctly ascertained, before his Majesty had, by the reduction of his forces, and the surrender of his conquests, put out of his hands the most effectual means of obtaining redress and reparation. That this essential duty appears to have been, in a very great degree, neglected by his Majesty's ministers; and that such their neglect and omission have been highly injurious to the public interests. 4. "That it appears to this House, that on the 17th of October last, counter orders were dispatched by his Majesty's government, revoking the orders before given for the surrender of the Cape of Good Hope, and of the other conquests then held by his Majesty; and that the final order, by virtue of which his Majesty's forces actually evacuated the Cape, was sent on the 16th of November. That on the said 16th of November, the hostile spirit of France had (in the judgment of his Majesty's ministers, as now avowed by them) already been manifested, for more than six months, by one continued series of aggression, violence, and insult, for which neither reparation nor redress had, down to that moment, been obtained. That the offensive principle had already been distinctly advanced, of excluding his Majesty from all concern in the affairs of the Continent; that the Spanish and other priories had already been withdrawn from the Order of Malta; Piedmont, Parma, Placentia, and Elba, had been annexed to France; Switzerland had been attacked and subjugated, and the remonstrance of his Majesty's government upon that subject had been treated with indignity and contempt; the territory of the Batavian republic was at that very moment still occupied by the armies of the Chief Consul of France, and its internal administration still controlled by his interference and the French government was then actually engaged in the pursuit of those plans and measures for the subversion of the Turkish empire, to which his Majesty's declaration refers, as a violation of the treaty of peace. That in directing, under such circumstances, the final surrender of the Cape, without having previously explained or arranged the numerous points of difference and complaint which then actually subsisted between the two governments, his Majesty's ministers acted in contradiction to the sense which they had themselves manifested of their own duty, and have improvidently exposed to danger some of the most important interests of his Majesty's dominions. 5. "That, by all these instances of misconduct in the present ministers of his Majesty's government, they have proved themselves unworthy of the confidence reposed in them in such an important crisis as the present." As soon as the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Addington) sat down, Mr. PITT rose: If I possessed a full and clear opinion on the merits of the case, to the extent of either directly negativing or adopting the resolutions which have been proposed, I should, following the unbiassed dictates of my conscience, give my vote on that side to which my judgment inclined. If I agreed with my right honourable friend*, in thinking that the first steps we ought to take in duty to the public, were, by a retrospective survey of the conduct of ministers, to judge of their fitness to exercise the functions to which they are called; and if, upon that result, I were forced to conclude, that the papers on the table afforded evidence of criminality, of incapacity, of misconduct, then, however painful the sacrifice of private feelings might be, in taking such a part in the case of individuals whom I respect, I should feel myself bound to concur in an address to his Majesty, for the removal of his ministers. On the other hand, if I were one of those who considered the explanation afforded by ministers upon general points, so clear as to justify a decided negative of the propositions moved by the honourable gentleman over the way-a negative which would imply approbation, (for in such a matter to avoid ground of censure, may be considered the same as to have deserved applause,) I should feel myself happy in joining in a decided negative to the motion. But to this extent, either of approbation or of censure, I am unable to go. I cannot concur in the latter, or in the extent of the charges involved in the propositions which have been moved. Besides, I am aware of the inconveniences that would result from supporting any measure which has the tendency of the present motion, unless the clearest necessity exists for it. Though I do not dispute the right of this house to address the king for the removal of ministers, yet nothing is more mischievous than a parliamentary interference by declared censure, rendering the con * Mr. Grenville. |